Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio
Significance, Title Vii, New Era, New Majority, Pro-business Climate, What Is White Collar Crime?
Wards Cove Packing Company, Inc., et al.
Frank Atonio, et al.
That an earlier court judgment showing discrimination though "disparate impact" was incorrect.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Douglas M. Fryer
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Abraham A. Arditi
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
5 June 1989
A racially segregated workforce does not show discrimination on the part of the employer if that workforce is a reflection of the pool of applicants, and thus is not in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Furthermore, in such cases the plaintiff, not the employer, must show proof that a specific hiring or personnel policy is responsible for an unfairly segregated workforce.
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
- Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229 (1976).
Criminal Law. Fourth Edition. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
- Waters v. Churchill - Significance, A Reasonable Belief, She Said She Said, Impact, Whistleblower Protection Act Of 1989
- Ward v. Rock Against Racism - Rock And A Loud Place, A Sound Lesson
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - Significance
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - Further Readings
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - Title Vii
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - New Era
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - New Majority
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - Pro-business Climate
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio - What Is White Collar Crime?
- Other Free Encyclopedias